Email in: Shep's BA ideas (jumpers & devs)

"Kirbs,



What are you thoughts on Shep's idea of mixing jumpers and devs. It sounds interesting and would give my jumpers a bit more flexibility than I currently have. My basic thought would be to substitute my vanguard with devastators. Let me see your take on such a list."

This in from Jason again. Link can be found here on YTTH, Shep’s list & thoughts are in the comments section. What Shep (and Jason) are suggesting is replacing the VV of a pure Jumper list (sample linked) with Devs and an extra Priest. With appropriate point management you could get 2 full squads w/2 ML + Priest replacing the 2 VV squads and have 35 pts to play with still or drop also a HG squad for a 3rd Dev squad. So is the pure Jumper better or do the MLs add enough to forego the loss of the VV? Let's take a look.

When running a pure Jumper army, VV are very important. Without them, Shep is completely right in pointing out people will be able to defend against it by castling and bubble-wraps. VV are able to assault any infantry which pop out of transports from the meltagun fire or chew into bubble-wraps. So the question is, do Devs do this better? Yes and no. With Devs on the table from T1, the Jumper army minus VV is more likely to cause vehicle damage in early turns and aren’t so fussed about bubble-wrap (on look, 48” range). However, this is only really important for popping tanks which hide at the back such as Manticores, Hammerheads, Predators, etc. and then are only really useful for suppression fire. Whilst not having those units firing on your dropped and clumped ASM/HG is a good thing, they still have to deal with bubble-wraps and front line tanks. If the Devs target the front line tanks, ASM have to deal with the tanks from the back lining shooting you up and aren’t able to assault the goodies which pop out. So there’s advantages and disadvantages both ways.

However, with a pure Jumper list w/VV you’re coming in and assaulting whilst threatening with a lot of melta. Whilst you’re still landing in front of your opponent and preparing to take a sucker punch to the jaw, your VV are tying up units which limits the incoming firepower your Jumpers are experiencing and dropping 50+ FNP Marines isn’t easy. Whilst armies like IG are still going to be happy chaps w/lots of blasts unless they are significantly neutralised, they still have a lot of FNP Marines to deal with some of which are already in combat. The same IG army is certainly capable of significantly damaging ~20 FNP marines in cover and isn’t really going to balk at 8 missiles a turn.

I’ll take a quick look at Shep’s examples so we can understand it a bit better. He was using a Tyranid list w/Tervigons against a Jumper w/ML list. Not sure on what the Tyranids had but also not sure how 8-12 missiles took out 2x Tervigons who should have had FNP cast on them & cover from T-Fexes (12*2/3*5/6*.5*.5 = 5/3 wounds a turn) but luck can be the undoing of anyone. If the opponent had VV he would have been able to clear away a significant portion of the Termagant bubble wrap and then attempt to isolate the TMC as much as possible. Whilst the Jumpers are taking a lot of firepower from T-Fex/Harpies/Tervigons/Tyrants/HG or whatever else was in the list, that’s a lot of FNP marines you have to get rid of and without the Termagant bubble-wrap, Tyranid torrent is coming from their shooting. Here I think the VV Jumper army would do better than the ML Jumper army due to the ability to remove bubble-wrap and protect their Tervigons from S8/AP3.

With Shep’s second game I understand he was playing IG against ML Jumpers. Here the Russes should of gone in front. Yes this makes them more vulnerable to melta drops but with bubble-wraps they should only have 1d6 against AV13 or 14 whilst the missiles are pinging against AV14. Much better than against AV12 of the Chimeras. Shep is right in pointing out if there had been no ML Devs, screening the Russes with Chimeras would have been the way, then no shots could have been plopped against the Russes but still bubble-wrap would of served the purpose better. Whilst VV Jumper wouldn’t like versusing that list either, they would of at least been able to tie up any units that got out of transports or bubble-wraps.

Overall I think VV are much better than the ML Devs, ignoring the disadvantage of them being on the table to begin with. The VV are capable of removing bubble-wraps or tying up units on the drop whilst the ML Devs are much better at suppression fire but bubble-wraps just laugh at them. This is I think the major difference. Even with tanks suppressed, the ASM cannot deal with bubble-wraps and a max of 6 tanks are going to be suppressed by 30 Devs meaning the opponent still has a lot of mobility after meltagun fire if there is a bubble-wrap. VV on the other hand are capable of limiting that mobility and whilst the army as a whole may take more firepower initially, their statline is built to take that initial thrust from shooting armies. I think ML Jumpers might do better against some armies (IG w/o bubble wrap for example) compared to VV Jumpers but I think VV Jumpers are the most competitive and balanced of the two lists with individuals finally understanding how to defend against deep strikes.

Here is a list though for Jason with correct points on how to run a ML Jumper list w/3 Dev squads:

2x Libby w/JP, Lance & Shield
HG w/JP, 2x meltagun

2x SP w/JP
SP

3x10xASM w/2x meltagun, hand flamer, PFist

3x10xDevs w/4x ML

Totals: 2000 pts
Infantry: 70 (39 jumpers, 31 foot)

P.S. I find Buzzer’s Jumper list in the comments @YTTH really familiar :p.